House Majority Whip Steve Scalise shot in Virginia

[commando]

i am not sure what he is saying....is he defending the gunman?

[Moiraine]

 

 

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/746022114042478592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.redcafe.net%2Fthreads%2Fcongressional-baseball-shooting-shooter-is-dead.429933%2Fpage-3

i am not sure what he is saying....is he defending the gunman?

 

He posted it 1 year ago.

[Bigred_inSD]

 

 

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/746022114042478592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.redcafe.net%2Fthreads%2Fcongressional-baseball-shooting-shooter-is-dead.429933%2Fpage-3

i am not sure what he is saying....is he defending the gunman?

Look at the date stamp on the tweet

[Nebfanatic]

 

 

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/746022114042478592?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.redcafe.net%2Fthreads%2Fcongressional-baseball-shooting-shooter-is-dead.429933%2Fpage-3

i am not sure what he is saying....is he defending the gunman?

check the tweet date commando. He said this a year ago

[Landlord]

Important disclaimer that I do not at all support this and find it sad and misguided, but I guess it does beg the question... isn't this the sort of thing that gun lobby says we need guns for?

[zoogs]

This is from 2016. It's easy in the abstract to carelessly champion talk of shooting at tyrannical governments. I expect Sen. Paul is not in the mood to field questions holding him to account.

[Fru]

Important disclaimer that I do not at all support this and find it sad and misguided, but I guess it does beg the question... isn't this the sort of thing that gun lobby says we need guns for?

 

Former members of Congress too.

 

[commando]

kk..my bad....thanks to everyone for pointing out the date of the tweet. that does make it clearer. lol.

[Nebfanatic]

This is from 2016. It's easy in the abstract to carelessly champion talk of shooting at tyrannical governments. I expect Sen. Paul is not in the mood to field questions holding him to account.

you have Mr. Paul all wrong, he is saying it's good to shoot at tyrannical governments. Clearly this administration isn't tyrannical!

[JJ Husker]

Important disclaimer that I do not at all support this and find it sad and misguided, but I guess it does beg the question... isn't this the sort of thing that gun lobby says we need guns for?

 

I'm pretty sure this is NOT what anyone says we need guns for.

Protection from an armed tyrannical government doesn't really apply to a baseball game, no matter who the attendees are.

[BigRedBuster]

 

Important disclaimer that I do not at all support this and find it sad and misguided, but I guess it does beg the question... isn't this the sort of thing that gun lobby says we need guns for?

 

I'm pretty sure this is NOT what anyone says we need guns for.

Protection from an armed tyrannical government doesn't really apply to a baseball game, no matter who the attendees are.

 

 

 

The statement by LOMS is wrong.

 

However, it's easy to see how the rhetoric from some on the gun rights side can be taken by a mentally deranged person as this is an appropriate thing to do.

[zoogs]

Two U.S. Congressmen were quoted on the previous page demonstrating LOMS to be correct.

 

Hitler or Stalin or Mao's governments featured ministers who got together to play baseball (or equivalent). There was always something seriously flawed, seriously ugly about this "use your guns to fight the government" talk. It precisely encourages this sort of action. Once you perceive this to be a tyrannical government, then it ceases to matter whether it's a baseball game or a ceremonial function or a parliamentary hall. That's the other side of it: in practice, all governments, tyrannical or not, will close ranks and be rendered the victim when something like this happened. The attacker becomes the bad guy -- and rightly so, because civic disobedience shouldn't mean taking up arms and becoming a murderer.

[Huskerzoo]

 

 

Important disclaimer that I do not at all support this and find it sad and misguided, but I guess it does beg the question... isn't this the sort of thing that gun lobby says we need guns for?

 

I'm pretty sure this is NOT what anyone says we need guns for.

Protection from an armed tyrannical government doesn't really apply to a baseball game, no matter who the attendees are.

 

 

 

The statement by LOMS is wrong.

 

However, it's easy to see how the rhetoric from some on the gun rights side can be taken by a mentally deranged person as this is an appropriate thing to do.

 

 

"Myth: People with mental health problems are violent and unpredictable.

Fact: The vast majority of people with mental health problems are no more likely to be violent than anyone else. Most people with mental illness are not violent and only 3%-5% of violent acts can be attributed to individuals living with a serious mental illness. In fact, people with severe mental illnesses are over 10 times more likely to be victims of violent crime than the general population. You probably know someone with a mental health problem and don't even realize it, because many people with mental health problems are highly active and productive members of our communities."

 

https://www.mentalhealth.gov/basics/myths-facts/index.html

[BigRedBuster]

Good Lord....I know most people with mental illnesses are not violent. Stop with the correcting of statements on this.

 

But, someone that does this and thinks this is an appropriate action has serious mental issues upstairs and the rhetoric going back and forth influences people like that to do things they shouldn't.

 

So....yes...the vast majority of mentally ill people are not violent. But, it would take a person with mental issues to do this.

 

 

 

That is....unless you think this is a normal American who just woke up and decided to go protect America.

[knapplc]

This is from the Gun Control thread, page 17. There are plenty of people who think the 2nd Amendment specifically IS for overthrowing the government, using guns.

 

 

 

The concept that the citizenry can do anything to prevent government tyranny through armed conflict went away with cavalry charges and cloth-winged aircraft.

So you're saying we're helpless then?

Answer your own question. You and 10,000 of your fellow gun-wielding citizens believe the only way to counter an out-of-control government is to take up arms. How successful will you be with the weapons in your gun cabinet?

I realize the situation. That doesn't mean you roll over and play dead. Like any revolution, if enough people make a stand against it, they will not allow tyranny to happen.

The government outguns you by orders of magnitude. There is no way we, no matter how strong our resolve, can defeat F-22s and cruise missiles with light arms. In this reality, the 2nd Amendment has NOTHING to do with overthrowing tyranny.

The 1st Amendment, however, will be the far more effective tool. In fact, it's the only tool we have that can successfully overthrow our government.